Legal advice for providers close to state lines

[lawyerinjeans]

I am an attorney that has developed a niche practice representing, advising and counseling providers in different aspects of the business. I've been encouraged by some local providers to post this piece of information on the national board so that it has a broader distribution. So, for what it is worth...

For providers whose geographic service area crosses state lines, I advise them that when they get a request for an outcall to say NYC, tell the client, "I'm coming from Connecticut, is that okay?" Even if the request is from the same state the provider actually is in, they still say they are crossing a state line. If that is said, then the providers has to say, "you have to pay $5.00 (or whatever) for my transportation and I'll need to collect that on arrival". Exactly how the provider states or words the need for transportation cost to be paid is not really important, it is only important that the client acknowledges that he is paying for cost of the provider's transportation. It can be de minimis, as long as it is part of the agreement for the provider's visit.

The Mann Act states:

Whoever knowingly transports any individual in interstate or
foreign commerce... with intent that such individual engage in prostitution,
or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged
with a criminal offense, shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned not more than five years, or both

When LEO is operating a sting, they are thinking in terms of arrest and prosecution under local or state laws. They don't pay much attention to whatever a provider may be saying to them, and will usually agree to anything the providers says. Since providers usually do not discuss money, or payment in any direct way, the stated requirement that the client pay for the transportation is a separate agreement particularly when an exact amount is stated.

This has proved to be an absolute defense against outcall stings (usually hotels). Of course the provider is arrested and processed, or more frequently allowed to go free if they don't have any complicating issues, and they receive a ticket or summons in the mail later. I've had perhaps 5 or 6 clients that have called me after being caught in a sting, and tell me they mentioned they were crossing state lines and that the client would have to pay for the transportation, etc. I have gone to the prosecutors office the next day and asked about the sting and who organized it, etc. I then tell the P.A. that I have reason to believe the officers operating the sting may have violated the Mann Act. Of course they deny it but they haven't heard the tapes and don't know for sure what the cops did. I demand that that any and all charges against my client be dropped immediately. I say that if the prosecutor wants to listen to the tapes, they may certainly do so, but if they hear the cops make incriminating statements regarding the Mann Act, they will have no choice but to inform the FBI and/or the U.S. Attorney's office and I mention the name of the assistance U.S. Attorney that would handle possible Mann Act violations. With one exception, all the charges have been dropped against my clients.

Admittedly, I think the word has gotten out around local LEO's because I've heard on a few occasions that as soon as the provider mentions the "I'm coming from [another state]" , etc. the caller has hung up, or said never mind.

For those of you that may be attorney's you can take a look at the Mann Act, 18 U.S.C. 2421 and advise your friendly local providers as to the value and/or benefit of this ploy.

[King_Louie]

Perhaps I'm missing a piece of the puzzle here, but if the Mann Act is punishable with a fine, up to five years in prison or both. How exactly does this equate to the charges being dropped and not being charged with some sexual trafficking offense. I guess more to the point is how exactly is the officer violating the Mann Act resulting in the charges being dropped?

[MarandaMarie]

Any advice for those of us not crossing a state line?

[ShysterJon]

Originally Posted by Marzipop

Any advice for those of us not crossing a state line?

Yes, don't try to change the topic in the middle of a thread. If you want general advice to avoid arrest, start a new thread.

[frenchlouie1986]

According to the OP by agreeing to pay the transportation fee local or state law enforcement are committing a federal felony offense. Would you trade a federal felony for what is in most cases a local or state misdemeanor?

In different times the Mann Act was known as the White Slave Traffic Act.

[Monica13]

There was a bust a while back in St Louis where they brought felony charges because the providers were crossing state lines. They seized cash, cars, phones, and laptops.

[simple55guy]

I'm going to start this by saying the obvious. .. I'm not an attorney.

So with that caveat, I have some questions. I don't see how this is helpful since LE are often allowed to break/bend the law during the course of an investigation? How would skirting the Mann Act be any different? As an extreme example we recently saw the feds operating a child Porn website for a while just to obtain IP addresses from violators.

What happens when a sting is targeting hobbyists instead of providers? Now gents have been schooled from previous experiences to accept as standard business when a provider mentions a travel fee for crossing state lines? I can't help but see Leo stings now including this trick: post an ad posing as a provider. Mention you are coming from out of state and need to be paid for the transportation. If a hobbyist agrees, is he not only on the hook for the soliciting charge but also for knowingly violating the Mann Act?

Sorry in advance if I completely missed the mark. I'd honestly like to under this. I guess I will put it plainly. I don't ever discuss fees for anything. Not in text, email, phone, or in person. I'm not going to have any kind of conversation with a provider regarding fees unless we are done fucking and somehow I shorted the donation. I'm not going to discuss or agree to even a travel fee. I I will rely on her reviews to be prepared for the donation and if I get it wrong, will address it after the session.

[Unique_Carpenter]

As LIJ (lawerinjeans) mentioned, his presentation was to enlighten folks about an issue pertinent to hobby legalistic activity.
To my knowledge he's hit at least a couple homeruns on this specific issue.
Granted in our area we have a state line running through the metro.
The point is that individual leos could be hit with a federal felony, which is beyond the scope of what a county pa can sweep under a rug.

[lawyerinjeans]

My apologies for not being more clear. It is a rather complicated legal point to try and make in a brief posting it doesn't seem I've done a very good job.

It is LEO that would be violating the Mann Act, not the provider. When the undercover cop makes the call for the appointment and is informed that the provider will be crossing a state line to come to the appointment, they are unwittingly causing a woman to cross a state lines for prostitution or other illegal purposes. The original act, made it illegal to transport a woman across state lines for "any immoral purpose". I gave the legal cite to the law and if you google it you can see the language. When I talk to the prosecutor, I tell them my client informed the undercover cop that she would be coming from, (e.g.) Kansas to Missouri for the appointment. As I said, LEO's don't really understand the significance of her saying that because they are focused on just getting the provider there so they can be busted. The most problematic part of setting LEO up, is making it clear that "he" has to pay for the transportation for her to travel over the state line. What constitutes "paying for transportation" has been interpreted differently in different jurisdictions. For instance, last I read, paying for a taxi might not make it. But why it has worked is that the local prosecutors usually aren't that familiar with federal law and probably just know its a federal crime to transport a woman across state lines for prostitution. What puts them in a bind, and why I've had success, is they really don't know what the hell was said during the phone conversation, and if they listen to the tape to find out, and there is evidence of a violation of the Mann Act, they have to turn the evidence over to the FBI. It is not a position the prosecutors want to be in. The first time I tried this, the prosecutor turned up his "prick factor" and denied even the possibility of such a thing happening, and started making half-assed threats to me and my client. Well, my prick factor goes up to 11, so I just told him I really wanted him to listen to the tapes because if cops are violating a federal law, it ought to come to light and I think the press would be interested in knowing cops were committing felonies to make misdemeanor arrests. The short of it is, the charges were withdrawn the next day.

[ShysterJon]

I think it's important to bear in mind that the statute speaks of "transporting" someone, not causing a person to cross a state line.

It seems to me that agreeing to pay travel expenses and transporting someone are different things. You mentioned that the amount for travel is irrelevant. Well, if the girl would be traveling from NJ to NY, agreeing to pay $5 hardly seems "transporting" her to me. Also, I would think the cop would have to actually pay the hooker her travel expenses for it to be a "transporting."

But hey, what do I know? A girl would have to travel more than 250 miles in any direction to cross a state line from Dallas, so I've never had a case involving the issue.

btw, in 2015, the penalty for violating the statute was increased to a potential of 10 years in prison.

[Buying a *Way to Heaven]

Simple55guy has it right. In real life the Bad Guys have nearly total immunity to prosecution and no accountability whatsoever, and they know it.

Furthermore, every Pigg reading this (and you can bet there are hundreds) now knows a trick they can use to try to trick someone into committing a Federal felony. It doesn't matter that no transportation, for immoral purposes or otherwise, actually occurs. U.S. courts have already proven themselves perfectly willing to send innocent men to prison for being baited into showing some possibility of willingness to have sex acts with "underage" girls who never even existed but who were cynically portrayed as being mature and experienced.

Gentlemen, the takeaway here is that if a "lady" ever asks you for any kind of assistance for transportation, or mentions that she is traveling from out of state, run away.

[Unique_Carpenter]

Buyin a way:
Not actually new news. This item is already mentioned in the fed playbook that they teach to local leo to encourage local leo to hunt traffickers. Cause being able to hang a heavy felony on a trafficker (pimp) is what the fed grant money is all about.

lij has taken the concept and turned it into a dropped muni/state charges when local leo fails to realize that there's a few guys like him that know how to protect their clients.

Btw, lij, nice ass kickin.

[frenchlouie1986]

According to Google Maps, it is only about: 80 miles to the Oklahoma border at Colbert along US Hwy 75, 78 miles to the Oklahoma border at Thackerville along IH 35, and 175 miles to Shreveport, LA along IH 20 from the Dallas County courthouse. I am sure it is probably about 20-50 miles closer from the outskirts of the city of Dallas or from one suburbs that make up the Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington Metropolitan Statistical Area.

[RandB fan]

You got to love it when your JOCO housewife/ provider (Yes, that is my mainstay when in KC) suddenly asks me to pay for her gas to make the trip to Westport (where I stay) because she read this or is maybe doing some "trade" with LIJ, and for some reason the bellhop has seen her picture from Homeland Security trafficking photos and the cops get called , I am now up able to be charged with a FELONY worth up to 10 years?

If I have dinner with a provider on 45th and St. Line and park my car on the west side, I could be charged with a felony if we get back to the hotel in MO and the bell hop calls the cops because they recognize the provider? I believe that is what the Mann act says, am I correct.

LIJ Maybe you should write a thread of how to protect us guys as that is the reason this website is here for.Free legal advise is worth exactly what you pay for it

I believe the best thing I ever did was to become aligned with the fab four probably before LIJ had Jeans, remember the good old days? LIJ?

http://www.whec.com/article/stories/s3888189.shtml

[lawyerinjeans]

I am amazed at how my comment is being read. My second post explicitly stated that it is LEO that would be violating the Mann Act, not the provider. And, it has no relevance whatsoever to a client. If you read the recent case law on the Mann Act, what constitutes "transporting" is being interpreted differently in different jurisdictions. Again, do not get caught up in the technicalities of the law. I have people (clients and providers) PM me all the time wanting to know if they do this, or don't do that, can they beat a prostitution charge. I usually say, "maybe". I could hold a day long trial, call witnesses and have my client sullied in open Court, and for probably $7,000 to $10,000 get him, or her off the charge. OR, for $1,000 I can get the prostitution charge amended to disorderly conduct (misdemeanor) and pay a 7 or 8 hundred dollar fine and its a done deal.

Why this works is not because of a technicality in the law, but because I put the prosecutor in an untenable position. If s/he listens to the tape, and if there is mention of crossing a state line for prostitution, they have to turn it over to FBI and the U.S. Attorney's Office can decide whether paying for transportation costs constitutes "transporting". The local prosecutor cannot chance listening to the tape for fear they have to turn their police over to the FBI for investigation. So it is not a technicality, its a ploy, and its worked pretty well so far.